Evolution of Cooperation in Spatial Traveler's Dilemma Game

Traveler''s dilemma (TD) is one of social dilemmas which has been well studied in the economics community, but it is attracted little attention in the physics community. The TD game is a two-person game. Each player can select an integer value between and () as a pure strategy. If both of them select the same value, the payoff to them will be that value. If the players select different values, say and (), then the payoff to the player who chooses the small value will be and the payoff to the other player will be . We term the player who selects a large value as the cooperator, and the one who chooses a small value as the defector. The reason is that if both of them select large values, it will result in a large total payoff. The Nash equilibrium of the TD game is to choose the smallest value . However, in previous behavioral studies, players in TD game typically select values that are much larger than , and the average selected value exhibits an inverse relationship with . To explain such anomalous behavior, in this paper, we study the evolution of cooperation in spatial traveler''s dilemma game where the players are located on a square lattice and each player plays TD games with his neighbors. Players in our model can adopt their neighbors'' strategies following two standard models of spatial game dynamics. Monte-Carlo simulation is applied to our model, and the results show that the cooperation level of the system, which is proportional to the average value of the strategies, decreases with increasing until is greater than the critical value where cooperation vanishes. Our findings indicate that spatial reciprocity promotes the evolution of cooperation in TD game and the spatial TD game model can interpret the anomalous behavior observed in previous behavioral experiments.     

Is it better to give information, receive it, or be ignorant in a two-player game?

The standard approach in a biological two-player game is toassume both players choose their actions independently of oneanother, having no information about their opponent's action(simultaneous game). However, this approach is not realisticin some circumstances. In many cases, one player chooses hisaction first and then the second player chooses her action withinformation about his action (Stackelberg game). We comparethese two games, which can be mathematically analyzed into twotypes, depending on the direction of the best response function(BRF) at the evolutionarily stable strategy in the simultaneousgame (ESS_sim). We subcategorize each type of game into two cases,depending on the change in payoff to one player, when both playersare at the ESS_sim, and the other player increases his action.Our results show that in cases where the BRF is decreasing atthe ESS_sim, the first player in the Stackelberg game receivesthe highest payoff, followed by both players in the simultaneousgame, followed by the second player in the Stackelberg game.In these cases, it is best to be the first Stackelberg player.In cases where the BRF is increasing at the ESS_sim, both Stackelbergplayers receive a higher payoff than players in a simultaneousgame. In these cases, it is better for both players to playa Stackelberg game rather than a simultaneous game. However,in some cases the first Stackelberg player receives a higherpayoff than the second Stackelberg player, and in some casesthe opposite is true.     

Action being character: a promising perspective on the solution concept of game theory

The inconsistency of predictions from solution concepts of conventional game theory with experimental observations is an enduring question. These solution concepts are based on the canonical rationality assumption that people are exclusively self-regarding utility maximizers. In this article, we think this assumption is problematic and, instead, assume that rational economic agents act as if they were maximizing their implicit utilities, which turns out to be a natural extension of the canonical rationality assumption. Implicit utility is defined by a player's character to reflect his personal weighting between cooperative, individualistic, and competitive social value orientations. The player who actually faces an implicit game chooses his strategy based on the common belief about the character distribution for a general player and the self-estimation of his own character, and he is not concerned about which strategies other players will choose and will never feel regret about his decision. It is shown by solving five paradigmatic games, the Dictator game, the Ultimatum game, the Prisoner's Dilemma game, the Public Goods game, and the Battle of the Sexes game, that the framework of implicit game and its corresponding solution concept, implicit equilibrium, based on this alternative assumption have potential for better explaining people's actual behaviors in social decision making situations.     

Properties of a mixed ESS candidate in continuous strategy sets

An evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) is a strategy that if almost all members of the population adopt, then this population cannot be invaded by any mutant strategy. An ESS is not necessarily a possible end point of the evolutionary process. Moreover, there are cases where the population evolves towards a strategy that is not an ESS. This paper studies the properties of a unique mixed ESS candidate in a continuous time animal conflict. A member of a group sized three finds itself at risk and needs the assistance of another group member to be saved. In this conflict, a player's strategy is to choose the probability distribution of the interval between the beginning of the game and the moment it assists the player which is at risk. We first assume that a player is only allowed to choose an exponential distribution, and show that in this case the ESS candidate is an attracting ESS; the population will always evolve towards this strategy, and once it is adopted by most members of the population it cannot be invaded by mutant strategies. Then, we extend the strategy sets and allow a player to choose any continuous distribution. We show that although this ESS candidate may no longer be an ESS, under fairly general conditions the population will tend towards it. This is done by characterizing types of strategies that if established in the population, can be invaded by this ESS candidate, and by presenting possible paths of transition from other types of common strategies to this ESS candidate.     

Evolutionarily stable strategies for a finite population and a variable contest size

This paper presents a generalization of Maynard Smith's concept of an evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) to cover the cases of a finite population and a variable contest size. Both equilibrium and stability conditions are analysed. The standard Maynard Smith ESS with an infinite population and a contest size of two (pairwise contests) is shown to be a special case of this generalized ESS. An important implication of the generalized ESS is that in finite populations the behaviour of an ESS player is "spiteful", in the sense that an ESS player acts not only to increase his payoff but also to decrease the payoffs of his competitors. The degree of this "spiteful" behaviour is shown to increase with a decrease in the population size, and so is most likely to be observed in small populations. The paper concludes with an extended example: a symmetric two-pure-strategies two-player game for a finite population. It is shown that a mixed strategy ESS is globally stable against invasion by any one type of mutant strategist. The condition for the start of simultaneous invasion by two types of mutant is also given.     

Leading the Game,Losing the Competition: Identifying Leaders and Followers in a Repeated Game

We explore a new method for identifying leaders and followers, LF, in repeated games by analyzing an experimental, repeated (50 rounds) game where Row player shifts the payoff between small and large values–a type of “investor” and Column player determines who gets the payoff–a type of “manager”. We found that i) the Investor (Row) most often is a leading player and the manager (Column) a follower. The longer the Investor leads the game, the higher is both player’s payoff. Surprisingly however, it is always the Manager that achieves the largest payoff. ii) The game has an efficient cooperative strategy where the players alternate in receiving a high payoff, but the players never identify, or accept, that strategy. iii) Under the assumption that the information used by the players is closely associated with the leader- follower sequence, and that information is available before the player’s decisions are made, the players switched LF- strategy primarily as a function of information on the Investor’s investment and moves and secondly as a function of the Manager’s payoff.     

Unpredictability induced by unfocused games in evolutionary game dynamics

Evolutionary game theory is a basis of replicator systems and has applications ranging from animal behavior and human language to ecosystems and other hierarchical network systems. Most studies in evolutionary game dynamics have focused on a single game, but, in many situations, we see that many games are played simultaneously. We construct a replicator equation with plural games by assuming that a reward of a player is a simple summation of the reward of each game. Even if the numbers of the strategies of the games are different, its dynamics can be described in one replicator equation. We here show that when players play several games at the same time, the fate of a single game cannot be determined without knowing the structures of the whole other games. The most absorbing fact is that even if a single game has a ESS (evolutionary stable strategy), the relative frequencies of strategies in the game does not always converge to the ESS point when other games are played simultaneously.     

Evolutionary dynamics of continuous strategy games on graphs and social networks under weak selection

Understanding the emergence of cooperation among selfish individuals has been a long-standing puzzle, which has been studied by a variety of game models. Most previous studies presumed that interactions between individuals are discrete, but it seems unrealistic in real systems. Recently, there are increasing interests in studying game models with a continuous strategy space. Existing research work on continuous strategy games mainly focuses on well-mixed populations. Especially, little theoretical work has been conducted on their evolutionary dynamics in a structured population. In the previous work (Zhong et al., BioSystems, 2012), we showed that under strong selection, continuous and discrete strategies have significantly different equilibrium and game dynamics in spatially structured populations. In this paper, we further study evolutionary dynamics of continuous strategy games under weak selection in structured populations. By using the fixation probability based stochastic dynamics, we derive exact conditions of natural selection favoring cooperation for the death–birth updating scheme. We also present a network gain decomposition of the game equilibrium, which might provide a new view of the network reciprocity in a quantitative way. Finally, we make a detailed comparison between games using discrete and continuous strategies. As compared to the former, we find that for the latter (i) the same selection conditions are derived for the general 2 × 2 game; especially, the rule b/c > k in a simplified Prisoner's Dilemma is valid as well; however, (ii) for a coordination game, interestingly, the risk-dominant strategy is disfavored. Numerical simulations have also been conducted to validate our results.     

Optimal Cooperation-Trap Strategies for the Iterated Rock-Paper-Scissors Game

In an iterated non-cooperative game, if all the players act to maximize their individual accumulated payoff, the system as a whole usually converges to a Nash equilibrium that poorly benefits any player. Here we show that such an undesirable destiny is avoidable in an iterated Rock-Paper-Scissors (RPS) game involving two rational players, X and Y. Player X has the option of proactively adopting a cooperation-trap strategy, which enforces complete cooperation from the rational player Y and leads to a highly beneficial and maximally fair situation to both players. That maximal degree of cooperation is achievable in such a competitive system with cyclic dominance of actions may stimulate further theoretical and empirical studies on how to resolve conflicts and enhance cooperation in human societies.     

Evolutionary Stability in the Asymmetric Volunteer's Dilemma

It is often assumed that in public goods games, contributors are either strong or weak players and each individual has an equal probability of exhibiting cooperation. It is difficult to explain why the public good is produced by strong individuals in some cooperation systems, and by weak individuals in others. Viewing the asymmetric volunteer''s dilemma game as an evolutionary game, we find that whether the strong or the weak players produce the public good depends on the initial condition (i.e., phenotype or initial strategy of individuals). These different evolutionarily stable strategies (ESS) associated with different initial conditions, can be interpreted as the production modes of public goods of different cooperation systems. A further analysis revealed that the strong player adopts a pure strategy but mixed strategies for the weak players to produce the public good, and that the probability of volunteering by weak players decreases with increasing group size or decreasing cost-benefit ratio. Our model shows that the defection probability of a “strong” player is greater than the “weak” players in the model of Diekmann (1993). This contradicts Selten''s (1980) model that public goods can only be produced by a strong player, is not an evolutionarily stable strategy, and will therefore disappear over evolutionary time. Our public good model with ESS has thus extended previous interpretations that the public good can only be produced by strong players in an asymmetric game.     

Can transitive inference evolve in animals playing the hawk-dove game?

What should an individual do if there are no reliable cues to the strength of a competitor when fighting with it for resources? We herein examine the evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) in the hawk-dove game, if the opponent's resource-holding potential (RHP) can only indirectly be inferred from the outcome of past interactions in the population. The strategies we examined include the classical mixed strategy in which no information on past games is utilized, the 'imprinting' strategy in which a player increases/decreases its aggressiveness if it wins/loses a game, the 'immediate inference' strategy in which a player can infer the strength of those opponents it fought before, and the 'transitive inference' strategy in which a player can infer the strength of a new opponent through a third party with which both players have fought before. Invasibility analysis for each pair of strategies revealed that (i) the transitive-inference strategy can always invade the mixed strategy and the imprinting strategy, and itself refuses invasion by these strategies; (ii) the largest advantage for transitive inference is achieved when the number of games played per individual in one generation is small and when the cost of losing an escalated game is large; (iii) the immediate inference, rather than the transitive inference, can be an ESS if the cost of fighting is small; (iv) a strong linear ranking is established in the population of transitive-inference strategists, though it does not perfectly correlate to the ranking by actual RHPs. We found that the advantage of the transitive inference is not in its ability to correct a misassessment (it is actually the worst in doing so), but in the ability of quickly lining up either incorrect or correct assessments to form a linear dominance hierarchy.     

Upstream reciprocity in heterogeneous networks

Many mechanisms for the emergence and maintenance of altruistic behavior in social dilemma situations have been proposed. Indirect reciprocity is one such mechanism, where other-regarding actions of a player are eventually rewarded by other players with whom the original player has not interacted. The upstream reciprocity (also called generalized indirect reciprocity) is a type of indirect reciprocity and represents the concept that those helped by somebody will help other unspecified players. In spite of the evidence for the enhancement of helping behavior by upstream reciprocity in rats and humans, theoretical support for this mechanism is not strong. In the present study, we numerically investigate upstream reciprocity in heterogeneous contact networks, in which the players generally have different number of neighbors. We show that heterogeneous networks considerably enhance cooperation in a game of upstream reciprocity. In heterogeneous networks, the most generous strategy, by which a player helps a neighbor on being helped and in addition initiates helping behavior, first occupies hubs in a network and then disseminates to other players. The scenario to achieve enhanced altruism resembles that seen in the case of the Prisoner's Dilemma game in heterogeneous networks.     

Revisiting matrix games: the concept of neighborhood invader strategies

We extend the concept of neighborhood invader strategy (NIS) to finite-dimensional matrix games and compare this concept to the evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) concept. We show that these two concepts are not equivalent in general. Just as ESS's may not be unique, NIS's may also not be unique. However, if there is an ESS and a NIS then these strategies must be the same. We show that an ESNIS (an ESS and NIS) for any matrix game is unique and that a mixed ESS with full support is a NIS. Thus a mixed ESS with full support is not invadable by any pure or mixed strategy and it can invade any pure or mixed strategy. An ESS which is an ESNIS, therefore, has better chance of being established evolutionarily through dynamic selection.     

Effect of the presence of empty sites on the evolution of cooperation by costly punishment in spatial games

Cooperation and spiteful behavior are still evolutionary puzzles. Costly punishment, for which the game payoff is the same as that of spiteful behavior, is one mechanism for promoting the evolution of cooperation. A spatially structured population facilitates the evolution of either cooperation or spite/punishment if cooperation is linked explicitly or implicitly with spite/punishment; a cooperator cooperates with another cooperator and punishes/spites the other type of player. Different updating rules in the evolutionary game produce different evolutionary outcomes: with one updating rule—the score-dependent viability model, in which a player dies with a probability inversely proportional to the game score and the resulting unoccupied site is colonized by one player chosen randomly—the evolution of spite/punishment is promoted more than with the other updating rule—the score-dependent fertility model, in which, after a player dies randomly, the site is colonized by a player with a higher game score. If the population has empty sites, spiteful players or punishers should have less chance to interact with others and then spite/punish others. Thus the presence of empty sites would affect the evolutionary dynamics of spite/punishment. Here, we investigated whether the presence of empty sites discourages the evolution of spite/punishment in both a lattice-structured population and a completely mixing population where players interact with others randomly, especially when the score-dependent viability model is adopted. In the lattice-structured population adopting this viability model, the presence of empty sites promoted the evolution of cooperation and did not reduce the effect of spite/punishment. In the completely mixing population, the presence of empty sites did not promote evolution of cooperation by punishment. The evolutionary dynamics of the score-dependent viability model with empty sites were close to those of the score-dependent fertility model.     

Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within sexes

Not all members of a sex behave in the same way. Frequency- and statusdependent selection have given rise to many alternative reproductive phenotypes within the sexes. The evolution and proximate control of these alternatives are only beginning to be understood. Although game theory has provided a theoretical framework, the concept of the mixed strategy has not been realized in nature, and alternative strategies are very rare. Recent findings suggest that almost all alternative reproductive phenotypes within the sexes are due to alternative tactics within a conditional strategy, and, as such, while the average fitnesses of the alternative phenotypes are unequal, the strategy is favoured in evolution. Proximate mechanisms that underlie alternative phenotypes may have many similarities with those operating between the sexes.     

The influence of cultural framing on play in the trust game: a Maasai example

The effects of cultural framing on behavior in experimental games were explored with a trust game and the Maasai concept of osotua. Maasai use the term osotua to refer to gift-giving relationships based on obligation, need, respect, and restraint. In the trust game, the first player is given money and an opportunity to give any portion of it to the second player. The amount given is then multiplied by the experimenter, and the second player has an opportunity to give any amount back to the first player. Fifty trust games were played by Maasai men at a field site in north central Kenya. Half of the games were played without deliberate framing, and half were framed with the statement, “This is an osotua game.” Compared to games with no deliberate framing, those played within the osotua rhetorical frame were associated with lower transfers by both players and with lower expected returns on the part of the first players. Osotua rhetorical framing is also associated with a negative correlation between amounts given by the first player and amounts returned by the second. These results have implications both for the experimental game method and for our understanding of the relationship between culture and behavior.     

Hormonal underpinnings of status conflict: Testosterone and cortisol are related to decisions and satisfaction in the hawk-dove game

A contribution to a special issue on Hormones and Human Competition.Testosterone is theorized to influence status-seeking behaviors such as social dominance and competitive behavior, but supporting evidence is mixed. The present study tested the roles of testosterone and cortisol in the hawk-dove game, a dyadic economic decision-making paradigm in which earnings depend on one's own and the other player's choices. If one person selects the hawk strategy and the other person selects the dove strategy, the player who selected hawk attains a greater financial pay-off (status differentiation). The worst financial outcome occurs when both players choose the hawk strategy (status confrontation). Ninety-eight undergraduate students (42 men) provided saliva samples and played ten rounds of the hawk-dove game with another same-sex participant. In support of the hypothesis that testosterone is related to status concern, individuals higher in basal testosterone made more hawk decisions — decisions that harmed the other player. Acute decreases in cortisol were also associated with more hawk decisions. There was some empirical support for the dual-hormone hypothesis as well: basal testosterone was positively related to satisfaction in the game among low basal-cortisol individuals but not among high basal-cortisol individuals. There were no significant sex differences in these hormonal effects. The present findings align with theories of hormones and status-seeking behavior at the individual level, but they also open up new avenues for research on hormone profiles at the collective level. Our results suggest that the presence of two or more high-testosterone members increases the likelihood of status confrontations over a limited resource that can undermine collective outcomes.     

Some game-theoretical aspects of parasitism and symbiosis

Given a two-person continuous non-constant sum game, a “solution” can be arrived at even in ignorance of the pay-off functions as each player tries to maximize his own pay-off by trial and error. The solution of the game considered here is either the intersection of two “optimal lines” (the case of the stable equilibrium) or parasitism of one player upon the other (the case of unstable equilibrium). The introduction of secondary satisfactions (linear combinations of the pay-offs) affects both the position and the stability of the equilibrium and thus the resulting primary satisfactions (the pay-offs). These effects of the matrix of transformation are investigated. In particular, it is shown that the social optimum, which is also the solution of the game where collusion is allowed, is attained if and only if the columns of the matrix are identical, and that this solution is generally stable. Some suggested connections with biological situations are discussed.     

Replicator dynamics for optional public good games

The public goods game represents a straightforward generalization of the prisoner's dilemma to an arbitrary number of players. Since the dominant strategy is to defect, both classical and evolutionary game theory predict the asocial outcome that no player contributes to the public goods. In contrast to the compulsory public goods game, optional participation provides a natural way to avoid deadlocks in the state of mutual defection. The three resulting strategies--collaboration or defection in the public goods game, as well as not joining at all--are studied by means of a replicator dynamics, which can be completely analysed in spite of the fact that the payoff terms are nonlinear. If cooperation is valuable enough, the dynamics exhibits a rock-scissors-paper type of cycling between the three strategies, leading to sizeable average levels of cooperation in the population. Thus, voluntary participation makes cooperation feasible. But for each strategy, the average payoff value remains equal to the earnings of those not participating in the public goods game.     

The replicator equation on graphs

We study evolutionary games on graphs. Each player is represented by a vertex of the graph. The edges denote who meets whom. A player can use any one of n strategies. Players obtain a payoff from interaction with all their immediate neighbors. We consider three different update rules, called 'birth-death', 'death-birth' and 'imitation'. A fourth update rule, 'pairwise comparison', is shown to be equivalent to birth-death updating in our model. We use pair approximation to describe the evolutionary game dynamics on regular graphs of degree k. In the limit of weak selection, we can derive a differential equation which describes how the average frequency of each strategy on the graph changes over time. Remarkably, this equation is a replicator equation with a transformed payoff matrix. Therefore, moving a game from a well-mixed population (the complete graph) onto a regular graph simply results in a transformation of the payoff matrix. The new payoff matrix is the sum of the original payoff matrix plus another matrix, which describes the local competition of strategies. We discuss the application of our theory to four particular examples, the Prisoner's Dilemma, the Snow-Drift game, a coordination game and the Rock-Scissors-Paper game.